Posted
by
Zonk
on Thursday January 18, 2007 @05:28PM
from the hopefully-in-a-burnable-format dept.

ubermiester writes "InfoWorld reports that Windows Vista will be available for legal download as of January 30th — the same day it will be available in retail stores. MS-NBC Online notes that, 'a relatively low number of computer users are likely to get Vista by downloading it from the Internet, but the mere availability indicates that Microsoft is fiddling with distribution methods for the extremely profitable franchise at the core of its business.' It will be available via the MS Marketplace site in conjunction with a Circuit City offering. Additionally, users who decide to 'upgrade' to a more expensive version of the OS can simply activate the features they want by unlocking them via online activation."

I'd imagine far more people downloaded the different betas than will buy a copy online. The internet survived the betas well enough. Those tubes are made of tough stuff.
As for reinstall, I'd imagine the download is something like an ISO file. It has to be burned to DVD to be usable, just like the betas. Then all you do is keep the burned DVD, perhaps keeping the file on the computer as a backup.

First of all, as far as I can tell, that article only applies to HD-DVD and Blu-Ray content. For example, "since S/PDIF doesn't provide any content protection, Vista requires that it bedisabled when playing protected content." I tried this with DRM protected audio (streaming from Zune Marketplace) and sure enough it played on my surround sound system with no problems. Similarly, I played a DVD with DTS audio perfectly fine over the optical cable (Vista actually made this easier since it ships with a DVD decoder, unlike XP which requires you to purchase a 3rd party decoder). In other words there is no loss in functionality with respect to existing DRM-protected media (i.e. if it worked on XP it'll work the same on Vista).

So if these problems only apply to HD-DVD and Blu-Ray, I don't see them as a criticism of Microsoft and Vista, but rather to the content producers who demand these changes. As far as I know, Apple has not announced the details of commericial HD playback, but I'd be surprised if they produce something with significantly fewer restrictions. And obviously Linux won't be supporting these discs legally any time soon. It seems to me that the best option is to just continue ignoring the existence of these new discs and you won't be affected by any of this.

Not to be stripped of any slashdot cred, but I don't understand why the GPP got modded down as a troll. While you can hold MS accountable for DRMing to death the HD DVD playback capabilities, its no more of a sellout than anything else MS has done for the past decade and more. And, IIRC, the media distributors are requiring all hardware, PC or otherwise, that plays HD DVDs to be DRMed to death. Blaming MS for a policy being handed to them from the media companies is like blaming MS software vendors for following idiotic MS policies, the policies aren't good, and (if it worked in an idealistic way) would be stopped by the free market, but they aren't the fault of the people who follow them.

Speaking of which, does anybody know how big Vista will be? I'm guessing somewhere in the 1GB range. That's a pretty large file to download. Bittorrent is the best way to do it, but I don't think MS will go for it.

Various reason to explain the discrepencies:- Poorly designed/optimized code will load all constants ('imediates' in machine code nomenclature) from 64 bits representations rather than 32 bits representations. In other words : all constants eats twice as much space as before.- Prefixes : On 32-bits processors, you need to use an opcode prefix to specify you work on 16bits instead of 32bits. In 64-bits machine code you have an aditionnal prefix to specify 32bits instead of 64bits data width. In other words,

This could also be because x86-64 has a lot of applications that don't work, and hence, aren't included with the distro. I know with Mandriva, if I install the 64 bit version (they are on the same disk) then there's a lot less packages to choose from.

OK, think for a minute about the bandwidth Microsoft must have available to handle the release of a major Service Pack for Windows.

Also, Microsoft had to deal with a huge rush of giant downloads when they made the release candidates for Vista freely downloadable from their website. Thousands of thousands of people were simultaneously downloading at high speed.

And they're paying Akamai (or whatever content distribution network they're using) out the arse for it too I'm sure. Luckily for Microsoft, that's not their turf so they just shell out some money and it doesn't completely fill the tubes.

No, Bittorrent will be where you go to find older versions of Windows, so you can get component video, or maybe just a stable system with no "tilt bits" purposefully introduced every time the compressor turns on in the kitchen fridge.

I must be turning into an old person, the kind you see still using rotary dial phones and rabbit ear antennas. Who needs this newfangled Vista crap! In my day, when you bought music or a movie, it was yours! Now they want you to rent every pleasurable stimulus that enters your senses! These city folk will do anything for a dollar!

Sorry, but in my experience downloading an iso from Microsoft is heck of a lot easier and quicker then bittorrent. Microsoft has quite big pipe on their end, and if their distribution method is at all similar to their technet and msdn downloads, it will be just a matter of downloading the iso and receiving your key. On both technet and msdn downloads, it only takes 1 to 3 hours to download vista on an ordinary DSL line.

Going back a few years, NT 3.1 was available in Server and Workstation versions. However, "Server" required that you already purchased Workstation, as inside the box was a brief manual and a 3.5" floppy disk. You converted WS to Server by applying the software on the disk.

In other words, all the software was installed on one version, but some extra bits were only enabled by coughing up extra money to unlock them.

It would be cool if you could just activate the individual features you are interested in, rather than have to buy say vista ultimate just to get one feature you need that happens only to be in ultimate.

That sounds way too close to buying your OS and then purchasing the applications you need and installing them seperate.

you could just activate the individual features you are interested in, rather than have to buy say vista ultimate just to get one feature you need that happens only to be in ultimate.

Too complex for a mass market distribution.

Ultimate seems to target the professional who needs a secure, high-performance, home office machine, but also enjoys media and gaming. Someone who would be inclined to spring for the whole package, anyway.

Sounds good, until that one feature you want requires twelve other features to be installed. It'd be just like yum, except instead of asking if it's ok to download 350MB, it asks if it's ok to charge you $350. Sign me up!

It would be even cooler if Vista offered any new features worth having. Between the high price and the high hardware performance cost, I'll be sticking with XP until its no longer available, or until "Longhorn" or whatever they're calling the new new version finally comes out.

...a relatively low number of computer users are likely to get Vista by downloading it from the Internet...

I would say that is accurate. If you're smart enough to be able to download Vista you can download your favorite Linux distro instead with less effort. It also stands a good chance of working with your hardware, unlike Vista.:)

As much as some can hate Microsoft, this is good and others should follow. At least good for the environment, less hardware, less energy used for shipping. Of course, the ability to burn an Install and Crash/Recover DVD is essential. It even allows reaching the customers faster. I guess it would also be appropriate to continue shipping physical copies for those with limited Internet access and/or want the user manual. (I don't think this will significantly impact piracy. Piracy will occur anyway.)

Okay so I don't imagine myself participating as a consumer, I have to admit that if they play this right, they will be able to sell minimalistic versions of their OS (or pass them out in magazines and newspapers) just to get things started. Then, if people want more functionality, say to burn a CD/DVD or whatever, they pay for it incrementally. It would make the OS feel more affordable. I can imagine many people going for this.

Through MSDN. You download the ISO and they give you a product key. Will the new download service work the same way?The bigger news is that Microsoft is also selling Office this way. I know I can't download Word/PowerPoint/Excel through MSDNAA, and I also believe that you can't download it from regular MSDN.

If I purchase it online, will the pricing only reflect Online Marketing costs, Online Packaging costs, Online Distribution costs, and the same development costs as are associated with the physical product? Or will it be more like traditional vendors where we are in effect paying the whole amount, and therefor paying for part of the physical product?

I highly doubt Microsoft will take into account activity based costing in respect to the product pricing. Especially since it would benefit them to charge the same amount or close to it, and improve the overall profitability of the physical product.

Somewhat on topic, apologies to be asking questions rather than spouting opinion:-)Re: the "Anytime upgrade" pricing schemes revealed here http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2007/jan0 7/01-17ConsumerOptionsPR.mspx [microsoft.com] "The manufacturer's suggested retail prices to upgrade to more premium editions of Windows Vista are as follows: Home Basic to Home Premium $79, Home Basic to Ultimate $199, Home Premium to Ultimate $159 and Business to Ultimate $139."

I beleive (and don't quote me on this) that in these situations HP do not bother re-imaging or making a new system specific installer but rather they simply ship you one of these OEM packs.http://ecommerce.intermediae.it/images/51.954.gif [intermediae.it]

Are you theorising or do you know anything on this for certain, as I'd love some more solid info.(Surely the CD key is still valid right?)

The CD Key is usually bound to that OEM vendor's "customized" install. Look at the COA on the machines... does it have a company name (Dell, HP, etc) written on the label? If so, the key is useless except on that type of machine.

The early adopters are generally the tech savvy ones, and in the past (think Win95 and XP launches) they are the ones who have been queueing up at midnight to buy the copies on the launch day.

This then provides extra free publicity, as the queue story inevitably gets picked up by the TV news media, which in turn will drive extra sales, as "Joe Average" sees that and thinks "Must be good, if people are prepared to wait up until midnight for it".

If I was buying Vista, I'd want to know that I could sell or transfer the license just as easily with a downloaded version as a boxed copy. Say 6 months later I belatedly see the light, decide to upgrade my machine to Ubuntu and sell my Vista license on eBay. I imagine that it'll be a lot harder to convince people it's genuine without a box, a physical DVD and a holographic sticker. Plus, I have to pay for a blank DVD to burn the download on.

Regardless of the software you're buying that's a terrible value proposition. It doesn't make sense to me unless they're offering a substantial discount.

On the other hand, I think this will actually be a good thing in countries like the UK where retail prices never reflect a fair currency conversion. (You poor Poms really do get screwed) A guess a lot of that mark up is tax, which for the moment most governments don't seen to have caught onto yet...

Yeah but this time (unlike buying from a 3rd party retailer), MS will have your credit card details on file, and would be much easier to verify against, than if you lost your licence details after any other kind of purchase.

Just bs=ceause yoyu have a liscense, doesn't mean it's legal to get them from an illegal source.Also, the liscense doesn't give you permission to get a copy whenever you need one, only a lisence to use the EXACT disk you purchased.So no, what you are doing is not legal.

Not that I care wehere you get you windoze, but what you are saying is right up there with the 'The police must identify themselves if you ask.' idiocy that circulates.

I called M$ about this one some years ago. They told me there is no problem to copy the windows CD, and use the same install CD on every computer I own if I have a valid license for each computer (i.e. different serial number ) In my case, they were even happy if I copy a friend Windows XP SP2, because I only had the Windows XP normal.I also had access to legit windows license available only online. You had no choice but to download the ISO or to use a friend CD. ( for info, that was the Microsoft program f

Microsoft has been doing download distribution of VISTA along with license keys throughout the beta program, I would imagine that the system they will be similar. The activation key is created by a server at Microsoft and it's basically the same thing you'd get on the outside of shrink wrapped box. If I forgot the key I can go back to my Microsoft account and retrieve it, or I can keep a copy on a burned CD or whatever.

As for corrupted downloads, in the process of the Vista beta I downloaded probably 10-15 different copies of the DVD ISO as I progressed through various builds and never had a single corrupted ISO, so I don't see that being a problem. If it had been corrupt I would simply have gone back and re-downloaded. I don't see any reason why the new system would not work the same way since there is no danger from a user downloading multiple copies of the ISO.

"The company plans to offer Windows and Office for sale on the Web using technology called digital locker, which can safely store the alphanumeric license "keys" that provide customers with rights to use its products, and resume interrupted downloads."
Sounds to me like they'll just give you a normal product key to print out.

I think you're getting confused with the idea of software that comes in two flavors of copy protection, either physical disc-based or online-activation based, where traditionally the former is the lesser of two evils.

But as of Windows XP, Windows already uses online internet activation, regardless of where the bits to install come from. So it doesn't make any difference whether you get it over the internet or get it off a disc. Either way, you enter the product key and the OS contacts Microsoft with a has

No - since Microsoft will doubtless be charging for the "new" features as they are unlocked. As such Microsoft will be recognising the income for the new features at the time they're sold (ie when the user unlocks them and pays ia their credit card over the tubes).

Apple's issue was that they determined they couldn't unlock extra functionality for free. Microsoft has no intention of upgrading a downloaded user at no charge.

No, its not microtransactions. There are six tiers of Vista, similar to the tiering you already see in most name MS products: Home User, Professional, Business, yadda yadda. Each comes with a different feature set and price point. If you want a feature that your version doesn't support (example: you're Home User Basic but you really want the Aero look&feel), you say "Alright, upgrade me to Home Premium!" and pay $LOTS rather than saying "Alright, unlock Aero!" and pay $LITTLE.You can see the general